top of page

Information Technology Act 2000 Section 61

IT Act Section 61 defines offences related to tampering with computer source documents and prescribes penalties.

Information Technology Act Section 61 addresses the offence of tampering with computer source documents. This section criminalises the intentional alteration, destruction, or concealment of source codes used for computer programs. It is crucial in protecting the integrity of software and digital systems in today's technology-driven world.

With increasing reliance on digital infrastructure, tampering with source documents can lead to severe consequences, including data breaches and system failures. This section impacts users, businesses, and law enforcement by providing a legal framework to deter and punish such offences.

Information Technology Act Section 61 – Exact Provision

This section makes it a punishable offence to tamper with computer source codes when they are legally required to be produced. It ensures that digital evidence and software integrity are maintained during investigations or legal proceedings.

  • Criminalises concealment, destruction, or alteration of source code.

  • Applies when source code is required by law or legal process.

  • Prescribes imprisonment up to three years or fine up to two lakh rupees.

  • Aims to protect digital evidence and software integrity.

Explanation of Information Technology Act Section 61

This section targets intentional tampering with computer source documents during legal processes.

  • States that knowingly altering or destroying source code is an offence.

  • Applies to individuals or entities handling computer programs or systems.

  • Triggered when source code is requested by law enforcement or courts.

  • Legal criteria include knowledge and intent to tamper.

  • Allows lawful production of source code without tampering.

  • Prohibits concealment, destruction, or alteration of source code.

Purpose and Rationale of IT Act Section 61

The section protects the authenticity and availability of computer source codes required in legal investigations. It prevents manipulation of digital evidence and supports the justice system.

  • Protects users and businesses from software tampering.

  • Prevents cybercrime involving source code manipulation.

  • Ensures secure and reliable electronic evidence.

  • Regulates behaviour during legal proceedings involving digital data.

When IT Act Section 61 Applies

This section applies when source code is legally demanded and someone tampers with it.

  • When a legal authority requires source code production.

  • When source code is concealed, destroyed, or altered intentionally.

  • Invoked by courts, law enforcement agencies.

  • Requires evidence of tampering and intent.

  • Relevant to computer, network, or software-related investigations.

  • Exceptions include accidental damage or authorised modifications.

Legal Effect of IT Act Section 61

This section creates a criminal offence restricting tampering with source codes. Penalties include imprisonment and fines. It impacts individuals and companies by enforcing compliance during investigations. It complements Indian Penal Code provisions on evidence tampering and fraud.

  • Rights to preserve digital evidence are reinforced.

  • Penalties include imprisonment up to three years and fines.

  • Supports prosecution of cyber offences involving source code.

Nature of Offence or Liability under IT Act Section 61

Section 61 imposes criminal liability for tampering with source documents. The offence is cognizable and non-bailable, requiring due legal process. Arrest generally requires a warrant unless caught in the act.

  • Criminal offence with cognizable status.

  • Non-bailable nature depending on case facts.

  • Arrest usually requires warrant.

  • Focus on intentional and knowing tampering.

Stage of Proceedings Where IT Act Section 61 Applies

This section is relevant during investigation, evidence collection, trial, and appeal stages involving source code tampering.

  • Investigation includes gathering digital evidence and logs.

  • Evidence collection focuses on source code integrity.

  • Complaints filed by affected parties or authorities.

  • Trial examines intent and act of tampering.

  • Appeals consider procedural and substantive issues.

Penalties and Consequences under IT Act Section 61

Violators face imprisonment up to three years, fines up to two lakh rupees, or both. Companies may face corporate liability if responsible. Intermediaries must ensure compliance to avoid penalties. Compensation claims may arise from damages.

  • Imprisonment up to three years.

  • Fine up to two lakh rupees.

  • Corporate and intermediary liability possible.

  • Compensation claims for affected parties.

Example of IT Act Section 61 in Practical Use

X, a software developer, is ordered by a court to produce source code for an investigation. Instead of complying, X deletes and alters the code to hide evidence. Authorities invoke Section 61 to prosecute X for tampering with source documents. This protects the integrity of the investigation and deters similar offences.

  • Shows legal consequences of source code tampering.

  • Highlights importance of compliance with legal orders.

Historical Background of IT Act Section 61

The IT Act was introduced to regulate electronic commerce, digital signatures, and cybercrime. Section 61 was created to address emerging cyber offences involving source code tampering. The 2008 amendment strengthened provisions against cybercrime, evolving with technological advances.

  • Introduced to secure digital transactions and evidence.

  • Amended in 2008 to enhance cybercrime laws.

  • Interpretation evolved with digital forensic practices.

Modern Relevance of IT Act Section 61

In 2026, cybersecurity and data protection are critical. Section 61 helps safeguard digital evidence amid increasing cyber threats. It supports fintech, online payments, and digital identity systems by ensuring source code integrity. Social media and intermediary reforms rely on such provisions for enforcement.

  • Protects digital evidence in cyber investigations.

  • Ensures online safety and trust in digital systems.

  • Addresses enforcement challenges in cybercrime.

Related Sections

  • IT Act Section 43 – Penalty for unauthorised access and data theft.

  • IT Act Section 65 – Tampering with computer source documents.

  • IT Act Section 66 – Computer-related offences.

  • IPC Section 420 – Cheating, relevant for online fraud.

  • Evidence Act Section 65B – Admissibility of electronic evidence.

  • CrPC Section 91 – Summons for digital records or documents.

Case References under IT Act Section 61

No landmark case directly interprets this section as of 2026.

Key Facts Summary for IT Act Section 61

  • Section: 61

  • Title: Tampering with Source Documents

  • Category: Cybercrime, Digital Evidence

  • Applies To: Individuals, Companies, Service Providers

  • Stage: Investigation, Trial, Appeal

  • Legal Effect: Criminal offence with penalties

  • Penalties: Imprisonment up to 3 years, fine up to ₹2 lakh

Conclusion on IT Act Section 61

Section 61 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 plays a vital role in preserving the integrity of computer source codes during legal proceedings. It deters tampering that could compromise digital evidence, ensuring fair investigations and trials. This protection is essential in an era where digital data forms the backbone of many transactions and communications.

By imposing stringent penalties, the section encourages compliance and accountability among individuals and organisations. It complements other cybercrime laws and supports the broader objective of securing India's digital ecosystem. Understanding and adhering to this provision is crucial for all stakeholders in the digital domain.

FAQs on IT Act Section 61

What constitutes tampering under Section 61?

Tampering includes knowingly concealing, destroying, or altering computer source code when it is legally required to be produced. Intent and knowledge are key elements.

Who can be held liable under this section?

Any person or entity who intentionally tampers with source code during legal processes can be held liable, including developers, companies, or intermediaries.

What are the penalties for violating Section 61?

Penalties include imprisonment up to three years, a fine up to two lakh rupees, or both, depending on the offence's severity.

Does Section 61 apply to accidental damage of source code?

No, the section targets intentional and knowing tampering. Accidental damage without intent is not punishable under this provision.

How does Section 61 support cybercrime investigations?

It ensures that source codes required as evidence remain intact and unaltered, preserving the integrity of digital investigations and legal proceedings.

Related Sections

CrPC Section 357B mandates the constitution of Victim Compensation Fund to aid victims of crimes and their families.

Consumer Protection Act 2019 Section 43 details penalties for manufacturers and service providers for misleading advertisements.

IPC Section 412 defines punishment for receiving stolen property knowing it to be stolen, ensuring protection against handling stolen goods.

CrPC Section 158 outlines the procedure for police to register an FIR upon receiving information about a cognizable offence.

Contract Act 1872 Section 67 deals with the obligation of parties to perform contracts with due diligence and care.

IPC Section 483 defines the offence of making a false statement in a declaration which is legally required, ensuring truthfulness in official declarations.

Contract Act 1872 Section 8 defines the communication, acceptance, and revocation of proposals in contract formation.

IPC Section 7 defines 'Local Law' as laws in force in a local area, clarifying their application within the Indian Penal Code.

Companies Act 2013 Section 40 governs the issue and transfer of shares, ensuring proper compliance and protection of shareholder rights.

Contract Act 1872 Section 5 defines when an agreement is legally enforceable as a contract.

CrPC Section 397 outlines the procedure for revision against orders passed by criminal courts, ensuring judicial oversight.

IPC Section 22 defines the term 'movable property' under Indian Penal Code, clarifying what constitutes movable property for legal purposes.

CrPC Section 416 defines the procedure for taking cognizance of offences by Magistrates upon police reports or complaints.

IT Act Section 67A prohibits publishing or transmitting sexually explicit material in electronic form, addressing child pornography and protecting minors online.

Companies Act 2013 Section 1 defines the short title, commencement, and extent of the Act.

IT Act Section 2 defines key terms used throughout the Information Technology Act, 2000 for clarity and legal interpretation.

CrPC Section 265A details the procedure for issuing summons in cases involving offences punishable with imprisonment up to three years.

Consumer Protection Act 2019 Section 5 establishes the Central Consumer Protection Authority for safeguarding consumer rights.

Companies Act 2013 Section 144 governs the power of the Central Government to remove names of companies from the register of companies.

IPC Section 489D addresses the offence of counterfeiting currency notes or banknotes, defining its scope and penalties.

Companies Act 2013 Section 59 governs the issue of share certificates and their legal implications for shareholders.

CrPC Section 105 outlines the procedure for security for keeping the peace or good behavior to prevent public disturbance.

IPC Section 460 defines punishment for committing theft by a clerk or servant in possession of property.

CrPC Section 407 details the procedure for transferring a case from one criminal court to another for trial or disposal.

CrPC Section 115 empowers Sessions Courts to transfer cases for fair trial and justice.

IPC Section 442 defines house trespass, covering unlawful entry into a property with intent to commit an offence or intimidate occupants.

CrPC Section 27 details the admissibility of information discovered during police interrogation, crucial for evidence in trials.

bottom of page